quote:

---

Originally posted by MattyB
thats wot i meant. maybe i should have used the work "tempt", than entice

But at the same time, i dont wanna sound like a dodgy "boy racer" kev

Matt

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by vibrio

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattyB

quote:

---

Originally posted by sxi boy

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattyB

quote:

---

Originally posted by sxi boy
i have been in steven's car and can confirm that yesh it is nippy

and PMSL @ matt, no really, i can feel moisture in by bell-end

you would in no way at all ever be able to touch steve's gti

---

I've never been out in a 106 GTi. I base my opinions from the video that Steve has put on the site for people to view, and from what i here bout these cars on PGAC.

Have you ever been out in my car? Or even a tuned 306 D Turbo for that matter? No u havent mate, so how u can judge the performance of my car i dont know. I think it may just be a case of "jumping on the bandwagon", like everyone else in this thread who has a pre-defined view of Diesels.

As i have said, untill i get to race a 106 GTi on the motorway from a rollin start @ 60mph, i'd love to see one "rocket" away from me. Or "rape me". or put me in a situation where i cannot even "touch" the 106.

Matt

---

jumping on the bandwagon

steves car is lighter, and more powerful, ive been in it, it is very fast for what it is

i have no doubt in my mind that it would brush aside a 'tuned' 306 diesel

---

Steves car is lighter and has more power. Wow - ur real clever mate.

However, if you had a braincell, you would know that a car needs Torque as well as power.

It is clearly seen from the video provided, that the torque drops off substantially around 70mph, as the rate off acceleration is very poor here, considering this is a 140bhp lightweight 3 door.

A GOOD POINT TO MAKE RIGHT NOW:

Take Steves 140bhp 106 Vs 140 bhp Corsa 2.0 16v (stripped down to exact weight of GTi + detuned to match bhp of 106)

Above 60, the corsa WOULD STORM that 106. And why???

SIMPLY coz of the torque. At the end of the day, there IS NO replacement for displacement.

If steve tuned that engine to 160bhp, its torque would still be stupidly low. Where as the 2.0 had 140 odd lb/torque as standard, which MAKES A MASSIVE difference. It makes a difference because the torque (turning force of the engine), means that the 2.0 can pull its way right thru 4th and 5th gears piss easy, where as the little screaming 1.6 struggles (WHICH IS VERY VISABLE FROM THE VID)

Matt

---

right so going by your argument you'd beat me cause you have more torque PGTF now

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sxi boy
if you had a brain cell you'd surely realise that your car wouldnt be able to touch steve's

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sxi boy
you're making the point about steve's lack of displacement well consider this, im running a 1.8 16v clio yes, now as it stands (chipped, sealed i/k, de-cat, full magnex, rolling on 17s) i have no doubt that steve would be slightly quicker than me and my car does not struggle

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon L
MattyB> My VTR has around 119bhp and 114lb/ft of torque, and i beat a 306 DTS @ Crail by a huge distance, and it wasnt gaining on me at any point. I roughly ran a 16 flat, and he was in the 18/19's i think, some were in the 20's.

I'd be interested to see your RR graph.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gambit

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattyB
thats wot i meant. maybe i should have used the work "tempt", than entice

But at the same time, i dont wanna sound like a dodgy "boy racer" kev

Matt

---

how about just saying, "fancy helping me out with a little experiment"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattyB

CAN U NOT READ???????

The whole point above is how 2 cars, both of the SAME weight and SAME bhp, but one running a 2.0 instead of 1.6. The 50lb/torque difference will be very noticeable, especially over 60mph.

My arguement DOES NOT include cars that are heavier, and not once did i say this. That was the whole point of the above comment

Not only is a punto GT a hell of a lot lighter than a 306, but it also runs a better gear box with better ratios, and has a far longer power band, so why would u even suggest i meant that???

In no way am i sayin that torque is the be all and end all, its just you replying to posts without even reading them

Matt

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattyB

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon L
MattyB> My VTR has around 119bhp and 114lb/ft of torque, and i beat a 306 DTS @ Crail by a huge distance, and it wasnt gaining on me at any point. I roughly ran a 16 flat, and he was in the 18/19's i think, some were in the 20's.

I'd be interested to see your RR graph.

---

Sorry i am not familier with Crail - i guess it is a 1/4 mile strip?

Power is vital for acceleration, which is why your modified with 120bhp will storm to 60 odd a hell of a lot quicker than a D Turbo, which is low on power (for its size), and there for its 0-60 is not that impressive.

Was the DTS tuned? If so, how much bhp/torque is it running? If u dont know either of these, then ur point is useless.

A standard DTS runs 92 bhp, and the turbo doesnt boost up till 3k revs, which is very poor. The fact that beat one in a light little NA saxo with 120bhp is hardly impressive, and no one would dispute the facts u have put forward.

At a guess, i would run bout 16.5->17s 1/4, and the fact that you too would beat me up the strip is a very good forcast. I do not dispute this, and have not done so in the entire thread.

However, what i would like to do, is sit at 50mph side by side on the motorway with a car such as yours, and see what the difference is when we both launch. I feel u may be very suprize, as i can pull 50-70 in 5s.

Please also note, that up the strip, the D Turbo driver has to battle with gear changes more often that you, and gear changes also take longer due to the derv box's set up.

Matt

[Edited on 20-11-2003 by MattyB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kev_Clio_172
sorry and what motor do u have to comment with....mate there is no difference in the speed of mk1 and mk2 on the move...lol i have had many races with mk1's....no difference.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kev_Clio_172
omfg sorry i just saw...haha punto gt....silver one in my area...so slow with a turbo the size of a golf ball...lol slow

[Edited on 20-11-2003 by Kev_Clio_172]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattyB

quote:

---

Originally posted by sxi boy
you're making the point about steve's lack of displacement well consider this, im running a 1.8 16v clio yes, now as it stands (chipped, sealed i/k, de-cat, full magnex, rolling on 17s) i have no doubt that steve would be slightly quicker than me and my car does not struggle

---

How much power/torque does your car produce?

Have you ever raced Steve's Car

How much does your car weigh?

You run 17"s, Steve is on std 14"s.

Matt

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jay@ffwd
Any scooby will race a 172 and win, not really a great race have a Evo here at work that would be interested..

---